|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Maeda - CRGL - SELI Joint Venture |
||
|
Contract No. DC/2007/12 - Design and Construction of Tsuen Wan Drainage Tunnel |
||
|
Monthly EM&A Report (August 2012) |
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
Hyder Consulting Limited Company Number 126012 47th Floor, Hopewell Centre Tel: +852 2911 2233 Fax: +852 2805
5028 hyder.hk@hyderconsulting.com |
|
||
|
|
|||
|
Maeda
- CRGL - SELI Joint Venture |
|||
|
Contract No. DC/2007/12 - Design and Construction of Tsuen Wan Drainage Tunnel |
|||
|
Monthly EM&A Report (August 2012) |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Report No |
EB000364R0841 |
||
|
Certified By |
F.C. Tsang ET Leader |
|
|
|
Verified By |
David Yeung Independent Environmental Checker |
|
|
|
Company Number 126012 47th Floor,
Hopewell Centre Tel: +852 2911 2233 Fax: +852 2805 5028 hyder.hk@hyderconsulting.com |
|
||
|
|
|||
|
Maeda - CRGL - SELI Joint Venture |
|||
|
Contract No. DC/2007/12 - Design and Construction of Tsuen Wan Drainage Tunnel |
|||
|
Monthly EM&A Report (August 2012) |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Author |
Edwin Chan |
|
|
|
Checker |
F.C. Tsang |
|
|
|
Approver |
John Berry |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Report No |
EB000364R0841 |
||
|
Date |
14 September
2012 |
||
|
|
|
||
|
This Monthly EM&A Report (August 2012) is prepared for Maeda - CRGL - SELI Joint Venture in accordance with the terms and conditions of appointment dated 18 December 2007. Hyder Consulting Limited (Company Number 126012) cannot accept any responsibility for any use of or reliance on the contents of this report by any third party. |
|
||
|
|
Table 3‑1 Air
Quality Monitoring Equipment
Table 3‑2 Air Quality Monitoring Locations
Table 3‑3 Action & Limit Levels for Air Quality
Table 3‑4 Event/Action Plan for Air Quality
Table 3‑5 Noise Monitoring Equipment
Table 3‑6 Noise Monitoring Locations
Table 3‑7 Action & Limit Levels for Air Borne Noise
Table 3‑8 Event/Action Plan for Airborne Noise
Table 3‑9 Water Quality Monitoring Equipment
Table 3‑10 Water Quality Monitoring Locations
Table 3‑11 Action/Limit Levels for Water Quality
Table 3‑12 Event/Action Plan for Water Quality
Table 4-1 Air Quality Monitoring
Results
Table 4-2 Air Borne Noise Monitoring
Results
Table 4-3 Summary of Exceedances for I-1
Table 4-4 Summary of Exceedances for I-2
Table 4-5 Summary of Exceedances for I-3
Table 4-6 Water Quality Monitoring Results
Table 4-7 Summary of
Project-Related Exceedances
Table 5-1 Waste Generated in August 2012
Table 6-1 Site Inspections
by ET
Table 7-1 Cumulative
Statistics of Environmental Complaints
|
APPENDICES |
|
|
Appendix A Site Map and Works Area
Appendix C Construction Programme
Appendix D Implementation Status of Environmental
Mitigation Measures
Appendix E Status of License and Permit
Appendix F Calibration Certificates
Appendix G Monitoring Locations
Appendix J Interim
Notifications of Environmental Quality Limits Exceedances
Appendix K Complaint
Log
l
According
to the EM&A Manual, there are four designated air quality monitoring
locations, five designated noise monitoring locations and five water quality
monitoring locations during the construction phase: (i) Sik Sik Yuen Ho Fung
College (ASR 1, NSR 1 and Intake I-1); (ii) Hong Hoi Chee Hong Temple (ASR 3,
NSR 3 and Intake I-2); (iii) Squatters (NSR 6 and Intake I-3); (iv) Beach Tower
(Long Beach Gardens) (ASR 8, NSR 8 and Outfall O-1); and (v) Greenview Terrace
(Block 1) (ASR 9, NSR 9 and Outfall O-1).
l
During the non restricted hours, major construction
activities undertaken by the Contractor at Tsuen Wan Drainage Tunnel included site
cleaning and tidying at Outfall, I-1, I-2 and I-3; excavation,
breaking for cascade, box culvert and vehicular access construction at Outfall;
construction of reinforced concrete (RC) structure of buttress wall and opened
tapered channel at Outfall; drilling hole and excavation for main adit tunnel
at I-3; backfilling for vortex drop shaft (VDS) at I-3; construction of man
access shaft RC structure at I-3; construction of vortex shaft RC structure at
I-3; excavation and construction of road drainage at I-3; tree planting at I-3;
excavation of main adit tunnel at I-2; construction of man access shaft, vortex
drop shaft and de-aeration chamber RC structure at I-2; installation of erosion
control mat and associated landscaping works at portion G at I-2; modification
works of 1500 mm step-channel outlet at portion G at I-2; installation of steel
works at portion G at I-2; construction of remaining box culvert RC structure
at I-1; excavation for construction of skin wall and inclined ramp at I-1; installation
of waterproof membrane and screeding and tiling works at I-1; and grouting and
segment repair works at Tunnel.
l No exceedances have been recorded for air quality monitoring during the reporting month.
l No exceedances have been recorded for noise monitoring during the
reporting month.
l
Exceedances for river water
quality monitoring are summarised in the
following table:
|
Parameter |
Action
Level Exceedance |
Limit
Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
One record at I-3 on 6 August 2012 |
|
SS |
One
record at I-2 on 1 August 2012; one record at I-3 on 24
August 2012; and one record at I-1 on 31
August 2012 |
One record at I-2 on 27 August 2012; and
one record at I-3 on 6 August 2012 |
l
Marine
water quality monitoring for dredging and marine works has been terminated
since 1 May 2012. As such, there was no marine water quality monitoring in this
reporting month.
l The status of waste generation in the
reporting month is:
·
A total of 2,431.6
m
·
About 32.6
m3 general waste was disposed of to NENT Landfill;
·
About 400.0
kg paper/cardboard was
recycled in the reporting month;
·
About 12.0
kg metal was generated in the reporting month;
·
About 20.0
kg plastic waste was disposed of in the reporting month; and
·
About 3,500 kg chemical waste
was disposed of in the reporting month.
l In this reporting month, two site inspections were carried out by ET and Independent Environmental Checker (IEC) respectively, to ensure proper implementation of environmental mitigation measures specified in the EM&A Manual and compliance with environmental legislation. All observations, which were recorded on the site inspection checklists, were passed to the Contractor together with the ET’s recommendations.
l As advised by the Contractor and verified by ET:
· No non-compliance regarding the site inspection was received in the reporting month;
· One environmental complaint at Intake-3 was received in the reporting month; and
· No summons and prosecution was received in the reporting month.
l The major construction works for the upcoming three months will be:
· Site cleaning and tidying at Outfall, I-1, I-2 and I-3;
· Construction of open tapered channel RC structure at Outfall;
· Excavation and construction of cascade and box culvert RC structure at Outfall;
· Construction of buttress wall at Outfall;
· Slope reinstatement works at Outfall;
· Finishing works for spiral ramp at Outfall;
· Construction of vehicular access RC structure from spiral ramp to box culvert at Outfall;
· Excavation and construction of permanent access road at I-3;
· Construction of road drainage works at I-3;
· Excavation and construction of main adit tunnel at I-3;
· Construction of vortex drop shaft RC structure at I-3;
· Construction of man access shaft RC structure at I-3;
· Construction of de-aeration chamber RC structure at I-3;
· Construction of approach channel RC Structure at I-3;
· Installation of trash grill at I-3;
· Tree planting at I-3;
· Excavation and construction of main adit tunnel at I-2;
· Construction of vortex drop shaft RC structure at I-2;
· Construction of man access shaft and man access adit RC structure at I-2;
· Construction of de-aeration chamber RC structure at I-2;
· Construction of approach channel RC structure at I-2;
· Construction of remaining box culvert RC structure at I-1;
· Construction of skin wall and inclined ramp at I-1;
· Finishing works for spiral ramp at I-1; and
· Grouting and segment repair works at Tunnel.
1.1.1
The
Drainage Services Department (DSD) proposed to construct a tunnel with an
internal diameter of 6.5 m and a length of 5.13 km, with the purpose to
alleviate the flooding risk in Tsuen Wan and Kwai Chung.
1.1.2
This
project is a Designated Project under Schedule 2 Part I Category Q, of the
Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) as part of the proposed Tsuen
Wan Drainage Tunnel (TWDT) passes underneath the existing Tai Mo Shan Country
Park. An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Study has
therefore been undertaken to provide information on the nature and extent of
environmental impacts arising from the construction and operation of the
proposed designated project and related activities taking place
concurrently. From the EIA, the
recommendations for monitoring contained herein are made.
1.1.3
The
Maeda-CRGL-SELI Joint Venture (MCSJV) was awarded by DSD with the Contract – Design
and Construction of Tsuen Wan Drainage Tunnel.
1.1.4
Hyder was
commissioned by the MCSJV as the Environmental Team (ET) to implement an
EM&A programme in accordance with the EM&A Manual. The proposed tunnel section flows from the
junction of Shing Mun Road and Wo Yi Hop Road and discharges to south of Yau
Kom Tau underneath Castle Peak Road as shown in Appendix A.
1.1.5
The
construction works of the Project was commenced in January 2008. This is the fifty-third monthly EM&A report summarising the impact monitoring
results and audit findings of the EM&A programme in August 2012.
2.1 Project Organization and Management Structure
2.1.1
The
organization chart and lines of communication with respect to the on-site
environmental management are shown in Appendix B.
2.2.1
The overall project programme from the detail design to completion
of all civil works shall take approximately 54 months. The construction programme is presented in
Appendix C.
2.2.2
The major construction
activities undertaken in the reporting month were:
l Site
cleaning and tidying at Outfall, I-1, I-2 and I-3;
l Excavation, breaking for cascade, box culvert
and vehicular access construction at outfall;
l Construction of reinforced concrete (RC)
structure of buttress wall and opened tapered channel at outfall;
l Drilling hole and excavation for main adit
tunnel at I-3;
l Backfilling for vortex drop shaft (VDS) at
I-3;
l Construction of man access shaft RC structure
at I-3;
l Construction of vortex shaft RC structure at
I-3;
l Excavation and construction of road drainage
at I-3;
l Tree planting at I-3;
l Excavation of main adit tunnel at I-2;
l Construction of man access shaft, vortex drop
shaft and de-aeration chamber RC structure at I-2;
l Installation of erosion control mat and
associated landscaping works at portion G at I-2;
l Modification works of 1500 mm step-channel
outlet at portion G at I-2;
l Installation of steel works at portion G at
I-2;
l Construction of remaining box culvert RC
structure at I-1;
l Excavation for construction of skin wall and
inclined ramp at I-1;
l Installation of waterproof membrane,
screeding and tiling works at I-1; and
l Grouting and segment repair works at Tunnel.
2.2.3
No marine mud
dredging works for basin scheme at portion E was conducted in the reporting
month, as all marine work were completed on 30 March 2012.
2.2.4
Fixing rebar
at de-aeration chamber (DAC) within noise enclosure at I-2, removing steel
formwork at I-2, and mucking out for main adit (MA) at I-3 were undertaken during the restricted hours in the
reporting period.
2.3.1
The
implemented environmental mitigation measures and their statuses are given in
Appendix D.
2.4 Statuses of Licences and Permits
2.4.1
A summary
of relevant permits and licences for the Project is given in Appendix E.
3.1.1
One-hour total
suspended particulates (TSP) levels were measured at the designated air quality
monitoring locations in accordance with the EM&A Manual. Information such as date of monitoring,
duration, weather condition, equipment used and monitoring results were
recorded on the field data sheet developed for the Project. The monitoring
results are presented in Section 4.
3.1.2
One-hour
TSP monitoring was carried out under typical weather conditions (with no
adverse weather such as typhoon signal or rain storm warning) three times every
six days using High Volume Air Samplers (HVASs). Monitoring was conducted in accordance with
the standard sampling method as set out in High Volume Method for Total
Suspended Particulates, Part 50 Chapter 1 Appendix B, Title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations of the USEPA.
3.1.3
After each
sampling, the filter paper loaded with dust was kept in a clean and tightly
sealed plastic bag. The filter paper was then re-conditioned in desiccators for
24 hours before obtaining the weight under laboratory conditions.
3.1.4
The average
concentrations of the TSP were calculated based on the following information
obtained from monitoring:
·
Flow rate;
·
Weight of
the filter paper before and after sampling; and
·
Sampling
period indicated by the elapsed-time meter.
3.1.5
All samples
were kept in good condition (i.e. stored in sealed plastic bags, with brief
description of the monitoring dates and locations) for a period of 6 months
before disposal. Sample analysis was carried out by ALS Technichem (HK) Pty Limited (HOKLAS Registration Number
066).
Monitoring Equipment and Calibration
3.1.6
High Volume
Air Samplers (HVASs) were used for 1-hour TSP monitoring to comply with the
USEPA specifications in Appendix B Part 5 - Reference Method for the Determination
of Suspended Particulate Matter in the Atmosphere (High-Volume Method) of the
Code of Federal Regulation dated June 1, 1991.
3.1.7
All HVASs were
calibrated before commencement of monitoring using standard orifice 5-points
calibration method with orifice calibrator to determine the actual flow rate of
each HVAS. This was used for the
calculation of the TSP level.
Calibration Kit Model - TE
|
Equipment Type |
Model |
Serial Number |
Calibration Orifice Number |
Location |
|
HVAS |
BM2000HX |
4994 |
1785 |
ASR 1 |
|
HVAS |
BM2000HX |
5875 |
1785 |
ASR 3 |
|
HVAS |
TE5005X |
1059 |
1785 |
ASR 8 |
|
HVAS |
TE5005X |
1713 |
1785 |
ASR 9 |
Table 3‑1 Air Quality Monitoring Equipment
3.1.8
Four
designated air quality monitoring locations were identified in the contract
specific EM&A manual. They are
listed in Table 3-2 below and shown in Appendix G.
|
Monitoring
Station ID |
Name of
Premises |
Floor
Level |
|
ASR1 |
|
G/F |
|
ASR3 |
|
Podium |
|
ASR8 |
Beach Tower (Long Beach Garden) |
G/F |
|
ASR9 |
Greenview Terrace (Block 1) |
G/F |
Table 3‑2 Air Quality Monitoring Locations
3.1.9
The Action
and Limit Levels for the 1-hour TSP monitoring are shown in Table 3-3. In case exceedances of Action and/or Limit
levels for air quality occur, Event Contingency Plans (ECPs) would be
implemented. The ECPs for Action and
Limit levels exceedances are shown in Table 3-4.
|
Station |
1-hour TSP Level in μg/m3 |
|
|
Action Level |
Limit Level |
|
|
ASR 1 |
307 |
500 |
|
ASR 3 |
327 |
500 |
|
ASR 8 |
337 |
500 |
|
ASR 9 |
329 |
500 |
Table 3‑3 Action & Limit Levels for Air
Quality
|
EVENT |
ACTION |
|||||||
|
ET |
IEC |
SOR |
CONTRACTOR |
|||||
|
ACTION
LEVEL |
||||||||
|
Exceedance
for one sample |
· Identify source, investigate the causes of exceedance and propose remedial measures; · Inform IEC and SOR; · Repeat measurement to confirm finding; · Increase monitoring frequency to daily. |
· Check monitoring data submitted by ET; · Check Contractor’s working method. |
· Notify Contractor. |
· Rectify any unacceptable practice; · Amend working methods if appropriate. |
||||
|
Exceedance
for two or more consecutive samples |
· Identify source; · Inform IEC and SOR; · Advise SOR on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures; · Repeat measurements to confirm findings; · Increase monitoring frequency to daily; · Discuss with IEC and Contractor on remedial actions required; · If exceedance continues, arrange meeting with IEC and SOR; · If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
· Check monitoring data submitted by ET; · Check Contractor’s working method; · Discuss with ET and Contractor on possible remedial measures; · Advise the ET on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures; · Supervise Implementation of remedial measures. |
· Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing; · Notify Contractor; · Ensure remedial measures properly implemented. |
· Submit proposals for remedial to SOR within 3 working days of notification; · Implement the agreed proposals; · Amend proposal if appropriate. |
||||
|
LIMIT
LEVEL |
||||||||
|
Exceedance
for one sample |
· Identify source, investigate the causes of exceedance and propose remedial measures; · Inform IEC, SOR, Contractor and EPD; · Repeat measurement to confirm finding; · Increase monitoring frequency to daily; · Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions and keep IEC, EPD and SOR informed of the results. |
· Check monitoring data submitted by ET; · Check Contractor’s working method; · Discuss with ET and Contractor on possible remedial measures; · Advise SOR on the effectiveness of the proposed remedial measures; · Supervise implementation of remedial measures. |
· Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing; · Notify Contractor; · Ensure remedial measures properly implemented. |
· Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance; · Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3 working days of notification; · Implement the agreed proposals; · Amend proposal if appropriate. |
||||
|
Exceedance
for two or more consecutive samples |
· Notify IEC, SOR, Contractor and EPD; · Identify source; · Repeat measurement to confirm findings; · Increase monitoring frequency to daily; · Carry out analysis of Contractor’s working procedures to determine possible mitigation to be implemented; · Arrange meeting with IEC and SOR to discuss the remedial actions to be taken; · Assess effectiveness of Contractor’s remedial actions and keep IEC, EPD and SOR informed of the results; · If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
· Discuss amongst SOR, ET, and Contractor on the potential remedial actions; · Review Contractor’s remedial actions whenever necessary to assure their effectiveness and advise SOR accordingly; · Supervise the implementation of remedial measures. |
· Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing; · Notify Contractor; · In consultation with the IEC, agree with the Contractor on the remedial measures to be implemented; · Ensure remedial measures properly implemented; · If exceedance continues, consider what portion of the work is responsible and instruct the Contractor to stop that portion of work until the exceedance is abated. |
· Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance; · Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3 working days of notification; · Implement the agreed proposals; · Resubmit proposals if problem still not under control; · Stop the relevant portion of works as determined by SOR until the exceedance is abated. |
||||
Table 3‑4 Event/Action Plan for Air Quality
3.2.1
The construction noise level was
measured in terms of equivalent A-weighted sound pressure level (Leq)
measured in decibels (dB(A)). Monitoring
of Leq(30 min) was carried out at the noise monitoring locations on
a weekly basis during normal construction working hours (0700-1900 hours from
Monday to Saturday except public holidays).
For all other time periods (i.e. restricted hours), Leq(5 min)
would be employed for comparison with the Noise Control Ordinance (NCO)
criteria if necessary.
3.2.2
The two statistical sound levels L10
and L90, the level exceeded for 10 and 90 percent of the time
respectively, were also recorded during monitoring. Major noise sources observed, both on-site
and off-site, were recorded on the field data sheet. All measurements were recorded and presented to
the nearest 0.1 dB(A) in this report.
Results are presented in Section 4.
3.2.3
Sound level meters, which comply with
the International Electrotechnical Commission Publication 651:1979 (Type 1) and
804:1985 (Type 1) specifications as referred to the Technical Memorandum (TM)
issued under the Noise Control Ordinance, were used. Noise levels for the A-weighted levels Leq(30
min), L10 and L90 were measured throughout the
impact monitoring. An average, by sound
power, of six consecutive 5-minute readings was used to provide Leq(30
min) for non-restricted hours (0700-1900 hours from Monday to Saturday
except public holidays). A facade
correction of 3 dB(A) was applied to the measurements that were carried out
under free field conditions.
3.2.4
During the impact monitoring,
parameters such as dates, weather condition, equipment used, measurement
results and major noise sources were recorded on the field data record
sheet. Monitoring would not be carried
out in the presence of fog, rain or strong wind with a steady speed exceeding
Monitoring Equipment and Calibration
3.2.5
Rion Precision Sound Level Meters of
Type NL-31 and B&K Integrating Sound Level Meter of Type 2238 in compliance
with the International Electrotechnical Commission Publication specifications
(Paragraph 3.2.3) were used for noise monitoring in this reporting month.
3.2.6
Prior to and following each noise
measurement, the accuracy of the sound level meters was checked using an
acoustic calibrator generating a known sound pressure level at a known
frequency. Measurements were considered
as valid only if the calibration levels from before and after the noise
measurement agreed to within 1.0 dB(A). Sound
level meters and calibrators were calibrated annually to ensure they performed
to the same level of accuracy as stated in the manufacturer’s
specifications. The noise monitoring
equipment used during the reporting month are shown in Table 3-5 below. The calibration certificates are included in
Appendix F.
|
Equipment
Type |
Manufacturer |
Type
Number |
Serial
Number |
Location |
|
Sound
Level Meter |
Rion |
NL-31 |
00410224 |
NSR1,
NSR3, NSR6, NSR8 and NSR9 |
|
Sound
Level Meter |
B&K |
2238 |
2448529 |
|
|
Sound
Level Calibrator |
Rion |
NC-73 |
10486660 |
|
|
Sound
Level Calibrator |
B&K |
4231 |
2699361 |
Table 3‑5 Noise Monitoring Equipment
3.2.7 Five designated noise monitoring
locations were identified in the contract specific EM&A Manual. They are listed in Table 3-6 below and shown
in Appendix G. All the locations below
are in facade
measurement.
|
Monitoring Station ID |
Name of Premises |
Floor Level |
|
NSR1 |
|
G/F |
|
NSR3 |
|
Podium |
|
NSR6 |
Squatters |
G/F |
|
NSR8 |
Beach Tower (Long Beach Garden) |
G/F |
|
NSR9 |
Greenview Terrace (Block 1) |
Podium (up to 6 July 2009) Roof* (since 16 July 2009) |
* The noise monitoring
location of NSR9 had been adjusted to rooftop since 16 July 2009.
Table 3‑6 Noise Monitoring Locations
3.2.8
The Action and Limit levels for
construction noise are defined in Table 3-7.
If non-compliance of the criteria occurs, actions in accordance with the
Action Plan in Table 3-8 would be carried out.
|
Time Period |
Action |
Limit |
|
0700 – 1900 hours on normal weekdays |
When one documented complaint is received |
75 dB(A)* |
Table 3‑7 Action & Limit
Levels for Air Borne Noise
|
Event |
Action |
|||
|
ET
Leader |
IEC |
SOR |
Contractor |
|
|
Action
Level |
· Notify IEC and the Contractor. · Carry out investigation. · Report the results of investigation to IEC and the Contractor. · Discuss with the Contractor and formulate remedial measures. · Increase monitoring frequency to check mitigation measures. |
· Review with analysed results submitted by ET. · Review the proposed remedial measures by the Contractor and advise SOR accordingly. · Supervise the implementation of remedial measures. |
· Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing. · Notify the Contractor. · Require the Contractor to propose remedial measures for the analysed noise problem. · Ensure remedial measures are properly implemented. |
· Submit noise mitigation proposals to IEC. · Implement noise mitigation proposals. |
|
Limit
Level |
· Identify the source. · Notify IEC, SOR, EPD and the Contractor. · Repeat measurement to confirm findings. · Increase monitoring frequency. · Carry out analysis of Contractor’s working procedures to determine possible mitigation to be implemented. · Inform IEC, SOR, and EPD the causes and actions taken for the exceedances. · Assess effectiveness of the Contractor’s remedial actions and keep IEC, EPD and SOR informed of the results. · If exceedance stops, cease additional monitoring. |
· Discuss amongst SOR, ET Leader and the Contractor on the potential remedial actions. · Review the Contractor’s remedial actions whenever necessary to assure their effectiveness and advise SOR accordingly. · Supervise the implementation of remedial measures. |
· Confirm receipt of notification of exceedance in writing. · Notify the Contractor. · Require the Contractor to propose remedial measures for the analysed noise problem. · Ensure remedial measures are properly implemented. · If exceedance continues, consider what activity of the work is responsible and instruct the Contractor to stop that activity of work until the exceedance is abated. |
· Take immediate action to avoid further exceedance. · Submit proposals for remedial actions to IEC within 3 working days of notification. · Implement the agreed proposals. · Resubmit proposals if problem still not under control. · Stop the relevant activity of works as determined by the SOR until the exceedance is abated. |
Table 3‑8 Event/Action Plan for Airborne Noise
3.3.1
The water
quality impact would be insignificant with the protection measures recommended
in Section 5.6 of the EIA report.
However, in view of the sensitive nature of the rivers/streams and
bathing beaches near
the Project site, it is suggested that a programme of monitoring should be
established to confirm the effectiveness of these mitigation measures in
protecting these water bodies.
3.3.2
Monitoring for dissolved oxygen (DO), temperature, turbidity, pH and
suspended solids (SS) should be undertaken at designated monitoring locations. It should be noted that DO,
temperature, turbidity and pH should be measured in-situ whereas SS is assayed
in a laboratory.
3.3.3
In association with the water quality parameters, other relevant data
should also be measured, such as monitoring location/position, time, weather
conditions, and any special phenomena and description of work
underway at the construction site etc.
3.3.4
In accordance with the EM&A Manual, the water quality monitoring
for all specified parameters were measured at all designated monitoring
locations including control points at an interval of 3 days per week. DO,
temperature, turbidity, pH and SS measurements were undertaken at designated
monitoring locations.
3.3.5
It should be noted that water
samples for all monitoring parameters were collected, stored, preserved and analysed
according to Standard Methods, APHA 17 ed. and/or methods agreed by the
Director of Environmental Protection.
3.3.6
Each sample
was analysed in accordance with the APHA Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater, 18th edition, or an equivalent method
approved by the EPD. In any circumstance, the sample testing should comply with
a comprehensive quality assurance and quality control programme. The laboratory should be prepared to
demonstrate the quality programmes to the EPD when requested.
Monitoring Equipment and Calibration
3.3.7
All the water samples collected were transferred to clearly labelled and pre-cleaned sample containers
with necessary preservatives immediately after collection. The sample containers were provided by a
HOKLAS accredited laboratory. About 1 L of
samples was collected for all laboratory analysis. Following sampling, samples should be stored in a cool box at
temperature between 0 and 4 oC, and transported to the laboratory
within the sample retention time as advised by the laboratory under proper
chain-of-custody system. The water quality monitoring equipment used
during the reporting month is shown in Table 3-9 below.
|
Equipment Type |
Manufacturer |
Model |
Quantity |
|
DO / Temperature
Meter |
YSI |
55/12 |
1 |
|
DO / Temperature/ pH
Meter |
YSI |
Professional Plus |
1 |
|
pH Meter |
Hanna |
HI-8014 |
1 |
|
Turbidimeter |
HACH |
2100Q |
1 |
Table 3‑9 Water Quality Monitoring Equipment
3.3.8
All in-situ
monitoring equipment were checked and calibrated prior to use. They were calibrated by a laboratory
accredited under HOKLAS or any other international accreditation scheme, and
subsequently re-calibrated at 3 monthly intervals throughout all stages of the
water quality monitoring. Responses of
sensors and electrodes were checked with certified standard solutions before
each use. Wet bulb calibrations for all
DO meters were carried out before measurement at each monitoring location. For the on-site calibration of field
equipment, BS 127:1993, "Guide to field and on-site test methods for the
analysis of waters" was observed. The
calibration certificates are included in Appendix F.
3.3.9
Five designated impact monitoring locations (three river stations and two
marine stations) and five control locations (three river control stations and
two marine control stations) were identified in the contract specific EM&A Manual for river and
marine water quality monitoring. These monitoring stations are listed in Table 3-10 below and shown in Appendix G.
|
Monitoring Station ID |
Name of Premises |
|
River
|
|
|
I-1 |
Intake I-1 |
|
I-1-C |
Control of Intake I-1 |
|
I-2 |
Intake I-2 |
|
I-2-C |
Control of Intake I-2 |
|
I-3 |
Intake I-3 |
|
I-3-C* |
Control of Intake I-3 |
|
Marine |
|
|
O-1 (FT) and (ET) |
Outfall O-1 during Flood Tide and Ebb Tide |
|
O-1-C (FT) |
Control of Outfall O-1 during Flood Tide |
|
O-1-C (ET) |
Control of Outfall O-1 during Ebb Tide |
*The upper stream
location (I-3-C*) had been relocated from end of February 2009 due to coarse
stone blockage.
Table 3‑10 Water Quality Monitoring Locations
3.3.10
Note that there were two control stations for Outfall O-1, one for
sampling during flood tide and one for sampling during ebb tide. Only one of these control stations for
Outfall O-1 was sampled during each sampling. Control station to be sampled was determined
based on the tidal information provided by the Hong Kong Observatory.
3.3.11
Referring to Section 4.4 of the approved
Contract Specific EM&A Manual (Report No. EB000364R0273, dated 6 January
2010), while the construction of the Outfall requires minor dredging, water
quality monitoring at the Outfall shall be undertaken during the period of the
dredging works. As advised by the
Contractor, all relevant marine works at Portion E of the site were completed
in April 2012. As such, the ET submitted
a proposal to EPD on 30 April 2012 to terminate the marine water quality
monitoring effective from 1 May 2012. EPD
had no objection to the proposal in their reply on 7 May 2012.
3.3.12
The Action and Limit levels for water
quality monitoring parameters are defined in Table 3-11. In case of any exceedance,
appropriate actions would be undertaken in accordance with the Event and Action
Plan as described in Table 3-12.
|
Parameters |
Action |
Limit |
|
DO in
mg/L (Surface,
Middle and Bottom) |
Surface
and Middle 5%-ile
of baseline data for surface and
middle layer. Bottom 5%-ile
of baseline data for bottom layer. |
Surface
and Middle 4 mg/L
except 5 mg/L for Fish Culture Zone or 1%-ile
of baseline data for surface and middle layer Bottom 2 mg/L
or 1%-ile of baseline data for bottom layer |
|
SS in
mg/L (depth-averaged) |
95%-ile
of baseline data or 120% of upstream control station’s SS at the same tide of
the same day |
99%-ile
of baseline or 130% of upstream control station’s SS at the same tide of the
same day and specific sensitive receiver water quality requirements (e.g.
required suspended solids levels for concerned sea water intakes) |
|
Turbidity
(Tby) in NTU (depth-averaged) |
95%-ile
of baseline data or 120% of upstream control station’s Tby at the same tide
of the same day |
99%-ile
of baseline or 130% of upstream control station’s Tby at the same tide of the
same day |
Notes:
·
For DO, non-compliance of the water
quality limits occurs when monitoring result is lower than the limit.
·
For SS and Tby, non-compliance of the
water quality limits occurs when monitoring result is higher than the limits.
·
All the figures given in the table are
used for reference only and the EPD may amend the figures whenever it is
considered necessary.
Table 3‑11 Action/Limit Levels for Water Quality
|
Event |
ET Leader |
IEC |
SOR |
Contractor |
|
Action Level being exceeded by one sampling day |
· Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; · Identify source(s) of impact; · Inform IEC and Contractor; · Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; · Discuss mitigation measures with IEC and Contractor; and · Repeat measurement on next day of exceedance. |
· Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; · Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR accordingly; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
· Discuss with IEC on the proposed mitigation measures; and · Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented. |
· Inform the SOR and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing; · Rectify unacceptable practice; · Check all plant and equipment; · Consider changes of working methods; · Discuss with ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR; and · Implement the agreed mitigation measures. |
|
Action Level being exceeded by more than one consecutive sampling day |
· Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; · Identify source(s) of impact; · Inform IEC and Contractor; · Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; · Discuss mitigation measures with IEC and Contractor; · Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; · Prepare to increase the monitoring frequency to daily; and · Repeat measurement on next day of exceedance. |
· Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; · Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR accordingly; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
· Discuss with IEC on the proposed mitigation measures; · Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
· Inform the Engineer and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing; · Rectify unacceptable practice; · Check all plant and equipment; · Consider changes of working methods; · Discuss with ET and IEC and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR within 3 working days; and · Implement the agreed mitigation measures. |
|
Limit Level being exceeded by one sampling day |
· Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; · Identify source(s) of impact; · Inform IEC, Contractor and EPD; · Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; · Discuss mitigation measures with IEC, SOR and Contractor; · Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; and · Increase the monitoring frequency to daily until no exceedance of Limit level. |
· Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; · Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR accordingly; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures.
|
· Discuss with IEC, ET and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; · Request Contractor to critically review the working methods; · Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
· Inform the SOR and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing; · Rectify unacceptable practice; · Check all plant and equipment; · Consider changes of working methods; · Discuss with ET, IEC and SOR and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR within 3 working days; and · Implement the agreed mitigation measures. |
|
Limit Level being exceeded by more than one consecutive sampling day |
· Repeat in-situ measurement to confirm findings; · Identify source(s) of impact; · Inform IEC, Contractor and EPD; · Check monitoring data, all plant, equipment and Contractor’s working methods; · Discuss mitigation measures with IEC, SOR and Contractor; · Ensure mitigation measures are implemented; and · Increase the monitoring frequency to daily until no exceedance of Limit level for two consecutive days. |
· Discuss with ET and Contractor on the mitigation measures; · Review proposals on mitigation measures submitted by Contractor and advise the SOR accordingly; and · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures. |
· Discuss with IEC, ET and Contractor on the proposed mitigation measures; · Request Contractor to critically review the working methods; · Make agreement on the mitigation measures to be implemented; · Assess the effectiveness of the implemented mitigation measures; and · Consider and instruct, if necessary, the Contractor to slow down or to stop all or part of the marine work until no exceedance of Limit Level. |
· Inform the SOR and confirm notification of the non-compliance in writing; · Rectify unacceptable practice; · Check all plant and equipment; · Consider changes of working methods; · Discuss with ET, IEC and SOR and propose mitigation measures to IEC and SOR within 3 working days; · Implement the agreed mitigation measures; and · As directed by the SOR, to slow down or to stop all or part of the marine work or construction activities. |
Table 3‑12 Event/Action Plan for Water Quality
4.1.1
The air
quality monitoring schedule of the reporting period is given in Appendix
H.
4.1.2
Results of 1-hour TSP level are shown
in Table 4-1. All measurements were
recorded and presented to the nearest 0.1 mg/m3
in this report. Detailed results
including weather conditions and graphical presentations are presented in
Appendix I.
|
Station |
Monitoring Date |
Monitoring Result (mg/m3) |
Action/Limit Levels (mg/m3) |
|
ASR 1 |
01-Aug-12 |
69.1 |
307/500 |
|
98.5 |
|||
|
99.8 |
|||
|
07-Aug-12 |
51.2 |
||
|
44.8 |
|||
|
62.7 |
|||
|
13-Aug-12 |
55.0 |
||
|
14.1 |
|||
|
24.3 |
|||
|
17-Aug-12 |
58.8 |
||
|
53.7 |
|||
|
67.8 |
|||
|
23-Aug-12 |
34.5 |
||
|
40.9 |
|||
|
16.6 |
|||
|
29-Aug-12 |
26.9 |
||
|
21.7 |
|||
|
19.2 |
|||
|
ASR 3 |
01-Aug-12 |
67.9 |
327/500 |
|
74.7 |
|||
|
81.4 |
|||
|
07-Aug-12 |
96.4 |
||
|
111.3 |
|||
|
109.9 |
|||
|
|
48.9 |
||
|
13-Aug-12 |
38.0 |
||
|
43.4 |
|||
|
17-Aug-12 |
36.6 |
||
|
36.6 |
|||
|
59.7 |
|||
|
23-Aug-12 |
40.7 |
||
|
59.7 |
|||
|
33.9 |
|||
|
29-Aug-12 |
23.1 |
||
|
19.0 |
|||
|
29.9 |
|||
|
ASR 8 |
01-Aug-12 |
104.6 |
337/500 |
|
66.1 |
|||
|
150.0 |
|||
|
07-Aug-12 |
137.6 |
||
|
152.7 |
|||
|
101.8 |
|||
|
13-Aug-12 |
42.7 |
||
|
24.8 |
|||
|
24.8 |
|||
|
17-Aug-12 |
85.3 |
||
|
86.7 |
|||
|
118.3 |
|||
|
23-Aug-12 |
68.8 |
||
|
50.9 |
|||
|
16.5 |
|||
|
29-Aug-12 |
33.0 |
||
|
34.4 |
|||
|
39.9 |
|||
|
ASR 9 |
01-Aug-12 |
97.1 |
329/500 |
|
130.4 |
|||
|
80.5 |
|||
|
07-Aug-12 |
181.7 |
||
|
120.7 |
|||
|
177.6 |
|||
|
13-Aug-12 |
54.1 |
||
|
29.1 |
|||
|
18.0 |
|||
|
17-Aug-12 |
18.0 |
329/500 |
|
|
52.7 |
|||
|
69.4 |
|||
|
23-Aug-12 |
16.6 |
||
|
20.8 |
|||
|
63.8 |
|||
|
29-Aug-12 |
73.5 |
||
|
25.0 |
|||
|
33.3 |
Note: Italic indicates the occurrence of exceedance of Action level
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit Level
Table 4-1 Air Quality
Monitoring Results
4.1.3
No project related air quality exceedance was
recorded in the reporting month.
4.2.1
The air borne noise monitoring schedule
of the reporting period is given in Appendix H. Results of measured noise
level, in terms of Leq (30min), during the construction are shown in
Table 4-2. All measurements including L10 and L90 are
recorded and presented to the nearest 0.1 dB(A) in this report. Detailed results including weather conditions
and graphical presentation are presented in Appendix I.
|
Station |
Monitoring Date |
Leq (30 min) dB(A) |
Limit Levels dB(A) |
|
NSR 1 |
01-Aug-12 |
64.5 |
70 |
|
07-Aug-12 |
67.3 |
||
|
13-Aug-12 |
68.0 |
||
|
23-Aug-12 |
64.5 |
||
|
29-Aug-12 |
64.3 |
||
|
NSR 3 |
01-Aug-12 |
63.8 |
75 |
|
07-Aug-12 |
61.7 |
||
|
13-Aug-12 |
73.7 |
||
|
23-Aug-12 |
72.1 |
||
|
29-Aug-12 |
70.3 |
||
|
NSR 6 |
01-Aug-12 |
59.5 |
|
|
07-Aug-12 |
63.8 |
||
|
13-Aug-12 |
58.8 |
||
|
23-Aug-12 |
62.4 |
||
|
29-Aug-12 |
62.3 |
||
|
NSR 8 |
01-Aug-12 |
64.2 |
|
|
07-Aug-12 |
63.7 |
||
|
13-Aug-12 |
64.1 |
||
|
23-Aug-12 |
68.0 |
||
|
29-Aug-12 |
66.0 |
||
|
NSR 9 |
01-Aug-12 |
68.5 |
|
|
07-Aug-12 |
68.9 |
||
|
13-Aug-12 |
66.1 |
||
|
23-Aug-12 |
71.7 |
||
|
29-Aug-12 |
71.4 |
||
|
|
|||
Table 4-2 Air Borne Noise Monitoring Results
4.2.2
No project related noise exceedance
was recorded in the reporting month.
4.3.1
The water quality monitoring schedule
of the reporting period is given in Appendix H. Summaries of exceedances for water quality monitoring
are provided in Table 4-3 to Table 4-5.
|
Parameter |
Action Level Exceedance |
Limit Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Nil |
|
SS |
One record on 31
August 2012 |
Nil |
|
Total |
1 |
0 |
Table 4-3 Summary of Exceedances for I-1
|
Parameter |
Action Level Exceedance |
Limit Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
Nil |
|
SS |
One record on 1 August
2012 |
One record on 27
August 2012 |
|
Total |
1 |
1 |
Table 4-4 Summary of Exceedances for I-2
Parameter |
Action Level Exceedance |
Limit Level Exceedance |
|
DO |
Nil |
Nil |
|
Turbidity |
Nil |
One record on 6 August 2012 |
|
SS |
One record on 24 August 2012 |
One record on 6 August 2012 |
|
Total |
1 |
2 |
Table 4-5 Summary of Exceedances for I-3
4.3.2
Results of measured water quality parameters during the reporting month
are shown in Table 4-6. Detailed results
including weather conditions and graphical presentations are enclosed in
Appendix I.
River Water Quality Monitoring
4.3.3
Six exceedances
were recorded for the river water quality monitoring within the reporting
month.
Exceedances of Turbidity Level
Limit
Level at I-3 on 6 August 2012
4.3.4 One exceedance of turbidity
limit level was recorded at I-3 on 6 August 2012. The measured turbidity level
(6.14 NTU) was higher than the baseline limit level, but lower than the turbidity
level (6.15 NTU) of the upstream control station (I-3-C). Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring day are given in Appendix
J. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedance was
considered to be contributed by the rainfall and high turbidity level at
upstream location. Since the exceedance was non-project related, no further
action was required.
Exceedances of
Suspended Solids Level
Action
Level at I-2 on 1 August 2012
4.3.5 One exceedance of SS action
level was recorded at I-2 on 1 August 2012. The measured SS level (2.90 mg/L)
was well below the baseline action/limit level, but higher than 120% of the SS
level (2.35 mg/L) of the upstream control station (I-2-C). Details of the
construction activities conducted on the monitoring day are given in Appendix
J. No direct disturbance was observed from the site. The exceedance was
considered to be contributed by natural variation. Since the exceedance was
non-project related, no further action was required.
Limit
Level at I-3 on 6 August 2012
4.3.6 One exceedance of SS limit
level was recorded at I-3 on 6 August 2012. The measured SS level (3.65 mg/L)
was lower than the baseline action / limit level, but higher than 130% of the
SS level (2.70 mg/L) of the upstream control
station (I-3-C). Details of the construction activities conducted on the
monitoring day are given in Appendix J. No direct disturbance was observed from
the site. Therefore, the exceedance was considered to be contributed by natural
variation. Since the exceedance was non-project related, no further action was
required.
Action
Level at I-3 on 24 August 2012
4.3.7 One exceedance of SS action
level was recorded at I-3 on 24 August 2012. The measured SS level (3.50 mg/L)
was lower than the baseline action / limit level, but higher than 120% of the
SS level (2.80 mg/L) of the upstream control
station (I-3-C). Details of the construction activities conducted on the
monitoring day are given in Appendix J. No direct disturbance was observed from
the site. Therefore, the exceedance was considered to be contributed by natural
variation. Since the exceedance was non-project related, no further action was
required.
Limit
Level at I-2 on 27 August 2012
4.3.8 One exceedance of SS limit
level was recorded at I-2 on 27 August 2012. The measured SS level (3.45 mg/L)
was lower than the baseline action / limit level, but higher than 130% of the
SS level (2.50 mg/L) of the upstream control
station (I-2-C). Details of the construction activities conducted on the
monitoring day are given in Appendix J. No direct disturbance was observed from
the site. Therefore, the exceedance was considered to be contributed by natural
variation. Since the exceedance was non-project related, no further action was
required.
Action
Level at I-1 on 31 August 2012
4.3.9 One exceedance of SS
action level was recorded at I-1 on 31 August 2012. The measured SS level (8.95
mg/L) was higher than the baseline action level, but lower than 120% of the SS
level (8.60 mg/L) of the upstream control
station (I-1-C). Details of the construction activities conducted on the
monitoring day are given in Appendix J. No direct disturbance was observed from
the site. Therefore, the exceedance was considered to be contributed by natural
variation and high SS level at upstream location. Since the exceedance was
non-project related, no further action was required.
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature (oC) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity (NTU) |
Action/Limit Level for Turbidity
(NTU) |
SS (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-1 |
01-Aug-12 |
30.60 |
7.17 |
3.42 / 3.34 |
7.92 |
2.69 |
9.75 / 12.47 |
2.20 |
8.85 / 10.17 |
|
|
03-Aug-12 |
30.70 |
7.06 |
|
7.95 |
2.49 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
06-Aug-12 |
30.20 |
7.34 |
|
7.87 |
5.54 |
|
3.45 |
|
|
|
08-Aug-12 |
31.10 |
6.96 |
|
7.87 |
2.60 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
10-Aug-12 |
29.30 |
7.29 |
|
7.85 |
2.91 |
|
2.20 |
|
|
|
13-Aug-12 |
27.75 |
7.77 |
|
7.92 |
4.16 |
|
2.30 |
|
|
|
15-Aug-12 |
32.10 |
6.89 |
|
7.81 |
4.80 |
|
2.40 |
|
|
|
17-Aug-12 |
27.00 |
7.42 |
|
7.89 |
4.06 |
|
2.55 |
|
|
|
20-Aug-12 |
29.80 |
7.11 |
|
7.95 |
5.89 |
|
2.45 |
|
|
|
22-Aug-12 |
26.90 |
7.32 |
|
7.97 |
3.56 |
|
2.30 |
|
|
|
24-Aug-12 |
28.40 |
7.08 |
|
7.88 |
4.09 |
|
6.10 |
|
|
|
27-Aug-12 |
31.15 |
7.31 |
|
7.97 |
6.09 |
|
6.20 |
|
|
|
29-Aug-12 |
29.70 |
7.34 |
|
7.98 |
7.71 |
|
8.20 |
|
|
|
31-Aug-12 |
29.35 |
7.30 |
|
7.97 |
6.07 |
|
8.95 |
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature (oC) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity (NTU) |
Action/Limit Level for Turbidity
(NTU) |
SS (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-1-C |
01-Aug-12 |
30.60 |
7.13 |
- / - |
7.92 |
2.70 |
- / - |
3.30 |
- / - |
|
|
03-Aug-12 |
30.70 |
7.00 |
|
7.95 |
2.52 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
06-Aug-12 |
30.20 |
7.40 |
|
7.88 |
5.66 |
|
2.95 |
|
|
|
08-Aug-12 |
30.95 |
6.90 |
|
7.87 |
2.71 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
10-Aug-12 |
29.30 |
7.22 |
|
7.85 |
3.04 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
13-Aug-12 |
27.70 |
7.71 |
|
7.92 |
4.23 |
|
2.15 |
|
|
|
15-Aug-12 |
32.10 |
7.00 |
|
7.80 |
4.85 |
|
2.70 |
|
|
|
17-Aug-12 |
26.90 |
7.50 |
|
7.88 |
4.20 |
|
2.75 |
|
|
|
20-Aug-12 |
30.00 |
7.19 |
|
7.94 |
5.94 |
|
2.75 |
|
|
|
22-Aug-12 |
26.60 |
7.22 |
|
7.97 |
3.81 |
|
2.15 |
|
|
|
24-Aug-12 |
28.20 |
7.22 |
|
7.88 |
4.20 |
|
5.15 |
|
|
|
27-Aug-12 |
31.10 |
7.25 |
|
7.96 |
6.54 |
|
7.15 |
|
|
|
29-Aug-12 |
29.70 |
7.21 |
|
7.98 |
7.63 |
|
7.85 |
|
|
|
31-Aug-12 |
29.30 |
7.23 |
|
7.97 |
6.25 |
|
8.60 |
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature (oC) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity (NTU) |
Action/Limit Level for Turbidity
(NTU) |
SS (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-2 |
01-Aug-12 |
30.80 |
7.33 |
3.66
/ 3.63 |
7.97 |
2.07 |
6.63
/ 6.99 |
2.90 |
7.68
/ 8.34 |
|
|
03-Aug-12 |
30.30 |
7.14 |
|
7.91 |
1.81 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
06-Aug-12 |
30.30 |
7.24 |
|
7.90 |
2.55 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
08-Aug-12 |
31.75 |
6.85 |
|
7.90 |
1.76 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
10-Aug-12 |
29.00 |
7.12 |
|
7.89 |
1.78 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
13-Aug-12 |
28.00 |
7.63 |
|
7.95 |
2.20 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
15-Aug-12 |
32.00 |
6.83 |
|
7.90 |
2.65 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Aug-12 |
27.45 |
7.37 |
|
7.91 |
3.53 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
20-Aug-12 |
29.60 |
7.15 |
|
7.90 |
3.02 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
22-Aug-12 |
27.10 |
7.34 |
|
7.90 |
2.10 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
24-Aug-12 |
29.10 |
7.13 |
|
7.91 |
3.30 |
|
3.10 |
|
|
|
27-Aug-12 |
31.60 |
7.23 |
|
7.91 |
2.53 |
|
3.45 |
|
|
|
29-Aug-12 |
29.70 |
7.24 |
|
7.87 |
2.09 |
|
2.05 |
|
|
|
31-Aug-12 |
29.00 |
7.24 |
|
7.92 |
2.25 |
|
<2.00 |
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature (oC) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity (NTU) |
Action/Limit Level for Turbidity
(NTU) |
SS (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-2-C |
01-Aug-12 |
30.80 |
7.24 |
- / - |
7.97 |
2.09 |
- / - |
2.35 |
- / - |
|
|
03-Aug-12 |
30.30 |
7.20 |
|
7.91 |
1.82 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
06-Aug-12 |
30.30 |
7.32 |
|
7.90 |
2.54 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
08-Aug-12 |
31.50 |
6.79 |
|
7.90 |
1.74 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
10-Aug-12 |
29.00 |
7.18 |
|
7.88 |
1.78 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
13-Aug-12 |
28.00 |
7.53 |
|
7.94 |
2.31 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
15-Aug-12 |
32.00 |
6.87 |
|
7.91 |
2.70 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Aug-12 |
27.40 |
7.44 |
|
7.91 |
3.58 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
20-Aug-12 |
29.60 |
7.21 |
|
7.90 |
3.10 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
22-Aug-12 |
27.10 |
7.35 |
|
7.90 |
2.23 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
24-Aug-12 |
29.00 |
7.02 |
|
7.91 |
3.47 |
|
3.90 |
|
|
|
27-Aug-12 |
31.60 |
7.39 |
|
7.91 |
2.49 |
|
2.50 |
|
|
|
29-Aug-12 |
29.90 |
7.36 |
|
7.86 |
2.13 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
31-Aug-12 |
29.10 |
7.39 |
|
7.92 |
2.38 |
|
<2.00 |
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature (oC) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity (NTU) |
Action/Limit Level for Turbidity
(NTU) |
SS (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-3 |
01-Aug-12 |
30.90 |
7.27 |
3.65 / 3.51 |
7.96 |
2.22 |
3.99 / 4.18 |
<2.00 |
6.13 / 7.23 |
|
|
03-Aug-12 |
30.20 |
7.13 |
|
7.90 |
3.43 |
|
2.75 |
|
|
|
06-Aug-12 |
30.60 |
7.30 |
|
7.91 |
6.14 |
|
3.65 |
|
|
|
08-Aug-12 |
31.60 |
6.89 |
|
7.91 |
2.21 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
10-Aug-12 |
29.10 |
7.22 |
|
7.90 |
3.07 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
13-Aug-12 |
27.90 |
7.66 |
|
7.96 |
3.42 |
|
3.05 |
|
|
|
15-Aug-12 |
31.75 |
6.81 |
|
7.91 |
1.66 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Aug-12 |
27.10 |
7.55 |
|
7.90 |
2.18 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
20-Aug-12 |
29.50 |
7.13 |
|
7.92 |
2.85 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
22-Aug-12 |
27.20 |
7.40 |
|
7.90 |
2.13 |
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
24-Aug-12 |
29.20 |
7.21 |
|
7.94 |
3.03 |
|
3.50 |
|
|
|
27-Aug-12 |
31.15 |
7.11 |
|
7.94 |
2.36 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
29-Aug-12 |
29.60 |
7.24 |
|
7.90 |
3.35 |
|
2.85 |
|
|
|
31-Aug-12 |
29.00 |
7.18 |
|
7.91 |
2.00 |
|
<2.00 |
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level.
Bold indicates
the occurrence of exceedance of Limit level.
|
Station |
Date |
Temperature (oC) |
DO (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for DO (mg/L) |
pH |
Turbidity (NTU) |
Action/Limit Level for Turbidity
(NTU) |
SS (mg/L) |
Action/Limit Level for SS (mg/L) |
|
I-3-C |
01-Aug-12 |
30.90 |
7.36 |
- / - |
7.95 |
2.30 |
- / - |
<2.00 |
- / - |
|
|
03-Aug-12 |
30.20 |
7.04 |
|
7.90 |
3.45 |
|
3.55 |
|
|
|
06-Aug-12 |
30.60 |
7.25 |
|
7.91 |
6.15 |
|
2.70 |
|
|
|
08-Aug-12 |
31.70 |
6.85 |
|
7.92 |
2.25 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
10-Aug-12 |
29.00 |
7.12 |
|
7.90 |
3.20 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
13-Aug-12 |
27.90 |
7.72 |
|
7.96 |
3.47 |
|
2.55 |
|
|
|
15-Aug-12 |
31.80 |
6.73 |
|
7.91 |
1.64 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
17-Aug-12 |
27.10 |
7.47 |
|
7.90 |
2.32 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
20-Aug-12 |
29.50 |
7.05 |
|
7.92 |
2.89 |
|
<2.00 |
|
|
|
22-Aug-12 |
27.20 |
7.33 |
|
7.90 |
2.08 |
|
2.05 |
|
|
|
24-Aug-12 |
29.30 |
7.15 |
|
7.94 |
3.06 |
|
2.80 |
|
|
|
27-Aug-12 |
31.20 |
7.15 |
|
7.94 |
2.67 |
|
2.45 |
|
|
|
29-Aug-12 |
29.60 |
7.17 |
|
7.90 |
3.47 |
|
2.75 |
|
|
|
31-Aug-12 |
29.00 |
7.11 |
|
7.90 |
2.04 |
|
2.55 |
|
Note: Italic indicates the
occurrence of exceedance of Action level. Bold indicates the occurrence of exceedance of Limit
level
Table 4-6 Water Quality Monitoring Results
4.4 Summary of Project-Related Exceedances
4.4.1
Table 4-7 summarises the project-related exceedance
results recorded in August 2012. Note that exceedances that are considered not related to the
construction activities are not included in this table.
|
Environmental Monitoring |
Total No. of Measurement |
Action Level Exceedance |
% of Action Level Exceedance |
Limit Level Exceedance |
% of Limit Level Exceedance |
|
Air
Quality |
72 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Air Borne Noise |
25 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Water |
84 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Table 4-7 Summary of Project-Related Exceedances
5.1.1
The status of waste management is summarised in Table 5-1.
|
Status of waste management |
Quantity |
|
Inert C&D Material Disposed of to Public
Fill at Tuen Mun (m3) |
2,431.6 |
|
Inert C&D Material Reused in this Contract
(m3) |
0 |
|
Inert C&D Material Reused in other
Contract(s)* (m3) |
265.0 |
|
Metals Generated (kg) |
12.0 |
|
Paper / Cardboard Packaging (kg) |
400.0 |
|
Plastics (kg) |
20.0 |
|
Chemical Waste (kg) |
3,500.0 |
|
General Waste Disposed of to NENT Landfill (m3) |
32.6 |
*
Other Contract(s) include(s) XRL823AB.
Table 5-1 Waste
Generated in August 2012
6 NON-COMPLIANCE AND DEFICIENCY
6.1.1
ET has carried out two site
inspections in the reporting month. All
observations together with the appropriate recommended mitigation measures
where necessary were recorded in the audit checklists that were passed to the
Contractor. Major environmental deficiencies observed during site inspections /
audits and recommendation, which were made by the ET, are summarised in Table 6-1 below. No
non-compliance was observed.
|
Inspection Date |
Observation |
Recommendation |
Status |
|
9
August 2012 |
1) Accumulation
of debris was found at Outfall; 2) Wrapping
of breaker tip was not in good condition at I-3. |
1) The
Contractor was reminded to clear the debris at Outfall; 2) The
Contractor was reminded to the wrap breaker tip properly and maintain it in
good condition at I-3. |
1) The
debris was cleared on 10 August 2012 and proper housekeeping was maintained.
(Closed) 2) The
breaker was replaced with an excavator due to the process on 9 August 2012. (Closed) |
|
23 August 2012 |
Oil drum was not
placed on a drip tray at I-3. |
The Contractor was
reminded to put the drip tray under the oil drum at I-3. |
Drip tray was placed
under the oil drum at I-3 on 23 August (Closed) |
Table
6-1 Site
Inspections by ET
7.1.1
A complaint hotline
at 9850 3241 of the Contractor has been established for the
Project.
7.1.2 One environmental complaint was received during the reporting
month.
7.1.3 Mr. Cheung, who was the complainant,
alleged that the water quality at Tso Kung Tam was
deteriorated due to the construction works at Intake 3. The verbal complaint from the complainant was
received by the government 1823 Call Centre (ICC) on 10 August
2012. Routine water quality monitoring upstream (I-3-C) and downstream (I-3)
of the construction site at Intake 3 has been carried out since the
commencement of construction works.
Monitoring was conducted on 8 August 2012 and 10 August 2012. The results indicate full compliance of water
quality at I-3 with the action / limit levels of the water quality monitoring
programme. Appropriate mitigation measures were implemented on-site during
monitoring on 8 and 10 August 2012.
Clear flowing stream water was visually observed during the monitoring
at I-3 on 10 August 2012. No significant
water pollution source from the construction site was identified. It was concluded that the construction works at I-3 did not generate
unacceptable water quality impact at Tso Kung Tam. As such, the concerned complaint is not
considered related to the construction works at Intake 3.
7.1.4 Details of the past complaint investigation and observations
can be referred to Appendix K.
7.1.5 Cumulative statistics of environmental
complaints are shown in Table 7-1.
|
Complaints Received in the Reporting Month |
Cumulative Number of Complaints |
|
1 |
25 |
Table 7-1 Cumulative Statistics of Environmental Complaints
8 SUMMARY OF NOTIFICATION OF SUMMONS, SUCCESSFUL PROSECUTIONS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
8.1.1 No summons and successful prosecution was received during the reporting month.
8.1.2 Cumulative statistics of notification of summons, successful prosecutions and convictions are shown in Table 8-1.
|
Notification of Summons |
Successful Prosecution
and Conviction |
||
|
August 2012 |
Cumulative |
August 2012 |
Cumulative |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Table 8-1 Cumulative Statistics of Notification of Summons and Successful Prosecutions and Convictions
9.1.1
The forecast of construction works for the
upcoming three months are:
· Site cleaning and tidying at Outfall, I-1, I-2 and I-3;
· Construction of open tapered channel RC structure at Outfall;
· Excavation and construction of cascade and box culvert RC structure at Outfall;
· Construction of buttress wall at Outfall;
· Slope reinstatement works at Outfall;
· Finishing works for spiral ramp at Outfall;
· Construction of vehicular access RC structure from spiral ramp to box culvert at Outfall;
· Excavation and construction of permanent access road at I-3;
· Construction of road drainage works at I-3;
· Excavation and construction of main adit tunnel at I-3;
· Construction of vortex drop shaft RC structure at I-3;
· Construction of man access shaft RC structure at I-3;
· Construction of de-aeration chamber RC structure at I-3;
· Construction of approach channel RC Structure at I-3;
· Installation of trash grill at I-3;
· Tree planting at I-3;
· Excavation and construction of main adit tunnel at I-2;
· Construction of vortex drop shaft RC structure at I-2;
· Construction of man access shaft and man access adit RC structure at I-2;
· Construction of de-aeration chamber RC structure at I-2;
· Construction of approach channel RC structure at I-2;
· Construction of remaining box culvert RC structure at I-1;
· Construction of skin wall and inclined ramp at I-1;
· Finishing works for spiral ramp at I-1; and
· Grouting and segment repair works at Tunnel.
|
|
|
|
|
Site Map and Works Area |
|
|
|
|
|
Organization Chart |
|
|
|
|
|
Construction Programme |
|
|
|
|
|
Implementation Status of Environmental Mitigation Measures |
|
|
|
|
|
Status of License and Permit |
|
|
|
|
|
Calibration Certificates |
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring Locations |
|
|
|
|
|
EM&A Schedule |
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring Results |
|
|
|
Interim Notifications of Environmental Quality Limits Exceedances |
|
|
|
Appendix K |
|
|
|
Complaint Log |